If you're "just complying with local law,"-- you better make sure there actually is a law!

Verso Technologies announced their first big deal for their skype-blocking software-- they are selling it to China. They claim that they are just helping Chinese telecom companies comply with local law (where have we heard that before?)

According to Verso, as reported in a great piece by Thomas Mennecke:

The trial is representative of the significant opportunities for Verso’s products in the Chinese market, where VoIP is highly regulated and the use of Skype software has been deemed illegal,” said Yves Desmet, senior vice president, worldwide sales, Verso Technologies. “More and more countries are following China’s direction in evaluating the risks associated with the growing popularity of P2P communication such as Skype, due to intense security concerns with the use of this medium for unlawful purposes and its impact on carriers’ revenues and the bottlenecks their networks are experiencing. We believe that this is just the beginning of a tremendous opportunity for Verso.

(For more on more and more countries following China’s lead read RConversations).

But Loose Wire asks the right questions:

I am not sure Verso’s Desmet is correct in saying “the use of Skype software has been deemed illegal.” I can find no reference to substantiate that. Is Verso being misleading by saying that, and using phrases such as “intense security concerns with the use of this medium for unlawful purposes” to make it sound like Skype and its ilk are a hotbed of triad and Al Qaeda activity?

More generally, when Verso talks of “security concerns” it’s talking about blocking viruses, illegal content (P2P files etc) and other unwanted nasties, as well as recently aired fears that Skype may have security holes allowing hackers to carry data anonymously. But of course in China “security” carries an extra connotation. VoIP, unlike ordinary telecommunications, is hard to monitor, eavesdrop and tap. Is Verso helping China to limit free speech?

If companies like Verso and Yahoo are going to use "compliance with local law" as a justification for assisting governments with censorship and oppression (and they shouldn't), they better make sure that there actually is a local law they're complying with, not just the mythology of China's oppression.